Debates of Dec. 7th, 2023

Business of Supply

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, a recent study has been brought up today in the debate by a well-respected University of Calgary economist, Trevor Tombe. Utilizing Statistics Canada data has shown that when considering both the direct and the indirect cost of the price on pollution, 94% of households with incomes below $50,000 receive rebates that exceed the carbon tax cost. Most of them see a net benefit of $20 to $40 a month, while 4% of them actually see a net gain of $70 per month. Even 55% of households with incomes above $250,000 a year receive more in rebates than they pay in the price on pollution.

Therefore, getting rid of the price on pollution would disproportionally benefit the ultrarich, and eliminating it would not only undermine a policy that is responsible for, according to the Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development, one-third of our carbon emissions reductions; it would also be a true reverse Robin Hood, which would steal from the poor to give to the rich, and that is not in the Christmas spirit.

What is actually boosting the price of fossil fuels in Canada? It is important to look at the facts. Since 2020, the carbon price on heating oil has increased by only 12¢ a litre, while the average price for heating oil is now 75¢ higher. What is driving up the other 63¢, or what is five times more responsible for the increase in cost? Canadians are overwhelmingly feeling the impacts of geopolitics, and fossil fuel inflation is caused by a rise in the global price of oil and gas. This includes the illegal and unjustified Russian war of aggression in Ukraine and the global disruption that has caused to the energy market. It is sad that the leader of the Conservative Party says nothing about this. He is quiet on support for Ukraine and has in fact abandoned it in its time of need by voting against updating a free trade agreement with Ukraine, which President Zelenskyy specifically asked for. As well, since Ukraine is one of the world's breadbaskets, we need to do everything we can to support it to win the war and end the disruption it has had on global food prices.

What else has caused fossil fuel prices to increase? It is the measure that OPEC is taking to squeeze the supply of oil. While the Conservatives will rail against so-called dictator oil as a reason why we should massively increase emissions in Canada, Canada imported double the amount of foreign oil when the Conservatives were last in power.

What happens when the global price of oil and gas rises? Of course, the oil and gas industry benefits. The oil and gas industry in Canada is making record profits by gobbling up the extra 63¢ a litre at the expense of Canadians. Since 2022, the oil and gas sector in Canada has had a $30-billion increase in profits, or a 1,000% increase since 2019. Where are these profits going? There has been $29 billion returned to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks. Where are these shareholders? Overwhelmingly, they are not even in Canada. Do we ever hear the Conservatives talk about this? Of course not. They would rather peddle alternative facts that would make even Donald Trump blush, with their factory discourse on the price on pollution.

It is bad enough that the Conservative MPs from where the federal system applies rail on these baseless claims, but many of the Conservative MPs from my province of British Columbia are making the claim as well. The hypocrisy is no more evident than with the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, who was part of the B.C. Liberal government that brought in the carbon tax in British Columbia. In 2017, he said in the B.C. legislature:

...our government made the decision to implement a tax on carbon....

Our carbon tax appears to be working. Independent studies have found that between 2008 and 2012, fuel use in B.C. dropped by 16 percent per capita. In 2015, a review of seven independent studies suggested that B.C.'s carbon tax has reduced emissions in the province by up to 15 percent....

We view this tax as a tool to change behaviour and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Of course, what the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge said in 2017 is the truth. A price on pollution is one-third of the reason Canada has reduced emissions by more than any other G7 country since 2019. However, not only is the argument they make on carbon pricing factually incorrect; Conservatives will say that we have not met a climate target, which is disingenuous, because our targets have always been for 2030 and 2050, and we are making major progress in getting there.

Today's update of our emissions reduction plan shows that we are on track to meet our emissions objective for 2026 and also on track to meet our 2030 targets to reduce emissions by at least 40%. Just this week, we have built on our progress to date by announcing two new measures, draft regulations that would reduce methane emissions from oil and gas by 75% by 2030, and, as announced just today, a groundbreaking framework that would cap and reduce emissions from the oil and gas sector and have them steadily reduce over time to ensure we meet our emissions reduction goal.

We know what the saying is: If someone repeats a falsehood enough times, even they will eventually believe it. If someone can convince themself so much that they internalize it, they can confidently spread those mistruths to Canadians.

In the challenging times the world is going through, people are looking for simple solutions. Enter the Conservatives, who will throw the complexity and the facts to the side and just want to talk about “common sense”. We saw what this jettisoning of the facts has done under the Conservatives before. During the Harper era, they completely gutted science in Canada, specifically anything related to the environment and to climate change. They also eliminated the long-form census because they do not actually believe in making policy based on evidence. We cannot go back to that. They do not actually want people to have lower heating bills; they want them to be stuck and strapped into the roller coaster of global fossil fuel prices. If they truly believed in saving Canadians money on energy, they would support our policies.

Switching from home heating oil to a heat pump will save families between $1,500 and $3,500 a year. That is why we are working with the provinces and territories to roll out programs to speed up the adoption of heat pumps in Canada. Together with switching to an EV, this can save families as much as $10,000 a year. The government is intent on making that happen with a series of incentives and programs. It is working. As I mentioned, emissions are going down. Over 18% of new vehicle sales were electric last year, and 26% of new vehicle sales in B.C. in the last quarter were zero-emission vehicles.

It is not only the future; it is also the present. We cannot let the Conservatives bring us back to the Stone Age. This motion, along with the last 12 or 18 or whatever it may, is simply a distraction from the real reason the cost of energy is high, which is, of course, the windfall profits from the oil and gas sector. The Conservatives would rather keep Canadians strapped into this roller coaster while the majority of foreign-owned fossil fuel companies are hosing Canadians, sending tens of billions of dollars from Canadians outside of the country while handing out massive bonuses to CEOs and cutting thousands of Canadian jobs. Instead, we are showing how we can deliver a cleaner and more prosperous economy.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague kind of missed the whole point of the motion being brought forward. It is that Canadians right now are suffering. They are having a hard time putting food on the table and a roof over their head.

Just in the last hour or so, the member for Kingston mentioned how difficult it is going to be for his constituents to transition. The member for Kings—Hants said that it does not matter how much it costs; the people in his riding will not be able to afford to transition, and the member for Whitby, my neighbour, said, the policies to go to net zero are going to be painful.

I am just wondering whether the member could be transparent and let Canadians know what other policies are in the pipe and what Liberal members of Parliament know that Canadians do not know that will cause more pain and make it more difficult to meet standards? What options are Canadians going to have if they just cannot afford to pay the unusually large taxes?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned in my speech earlier, the vast majority of Canadians actually receive more in rebates than they pay in the price on pollution. In fact, this is not just a climate measure; it is actually an affordability measure at the same time. We know that it is important to support Canadians so they can transition into cleaner forms of transportation and home heating. The member for Kings—Hants just talked about our program on supporting Canadians to adopt heat pumps. This is absolutely essential, because it will save Canadians a ton of money, especially low-income Canadians. It is important that we provide a lot of those supports up front, so it is important that we work with provinces and territories to do that. When we are talking about transitioning to electric vehicles, it is why it is important that we have those incentives there to support Canadians to adopt them until the price comes down. The price is starting to come down as the technology gets more and more mature and as we reach economies of scale.

There is a very important role for the government to assist in the rollout of a lot of these measures, and that is precisely what the government is committed to doing.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, there is one thing that I am not hearing being talked about and that is missing from this motion. This is making sure that big oil pays its share.

We know that Canada's five biggest oil and gas companies had $38 billion in combined profits last year, and they are on track to make record profits once again in 2023. The recent PBO report stated that, if it followed through, Canada could generate $4 billion in revenue from a windfall profit tax from big oil and gas.

When the NDP called for big oil to pay what it owed to get more help to families, why did the member side with the Conservatives and vote against it?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, the premise of her question is incorrect; I actually voted in favour of the NDP motion.

Many countries around the world have brought in windfall taxes on the oil and gas sector, at this time of especially high prices, to be able to provide that support to their residents. I think there is merit in that, because it does target the reason for the increased cost that Canadians are facing.

I also want to mention that, today, when we are seeing these record profits in this sector, it is not actually being invested into decarbonizing operations. That is why our announcement today that we are capping emissions from the oil and gas sector is so key: We want those record profits to be invested in reducing emissions.

This cap that we are bringing in is actually going to lead to a tremendous amount of new investment in Canada and new jobs, while also making sure that we can meet our emissions reduction targets. It is a very important measure that will be a key plank of our climate action.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here today and to speak to this. While I will be sharing my views here and sharing my time with the member for Red Deer—Mountain View, I want to tell members something I heard earlier that struck me as funny.

Members from the government have said that the Conservatives are taking the country back to the Stone Age. I just ate off a wooden fork. The wooden fork was created by the Byzantine Empire, by the Romans during the Roman period of the fourth century. It may have even been created much earlier, by the Greeks in the ancient world. Do members know how unpleasant that was? The thing that is interesting enough, and I know the member from Manitoba is going to love what I have to say, is that the government is putting Canadians back to the Ice Age, which came before the Stone Age, back when everything was freezing cold. That is what the Liberals have done to Canadians.

In this speech today, I will cover the negative impact of the carbon tax on farmers, first nations and families. Let us start with first nations.

I am proud to represent four first nations in Miramichi—Grand Lake: Metepenagiag, Eel Ground, Esgenoôpetitj and Elsipogtog. One of the proudest moments of my career was to be named the first-ever stand-alone aboriginal affairs minister for the great province of New Brunswick. It was an honour and a privilege to work with the 15 first nations chiefs, many of whom are here in Ottawa for the election of the new AFN chief. I congratulate Ms. Cindy Woodhouse on her election today.

I have gotten to spend time with many indigenous leaders this week, who have told me how frustrated they are after eight years of failed Liberal policies. One of the greatest myths in our country and in our time is that the Liberal Party of Canada is a friend to indigenous peoples. I will explain that mythology to members now and to the people watching. If the Liberals cannot get adequate drinking water for indigenous peoples, then let us not call them their friends; that is a necessity of life, and they have failed at that endeavour in every single element of it.

As another example, the Ontario first nations and the Attawapiskat First Nation are taking the Liberal government to court over the unfair carbon tax. They argue that the Liberal government's failed policy unjustly and disproportionately burdens their communities, which already face hardships because of a lack of basic infrastructure and severe poverty.

The chiefs of Ontario and Attawapiskat have tried to engage and negotiate with the Liberal government, but to no avail. Now, unnecessarily, they must spend money on lawyers to take the Liberal government to court. These residents do not have the money to install retrofits such as heat pumps. Many first nations are remote and lack basic infrastructure, such as clean drinking water, as aforementioned; moreover, they do not have access to viable alternatives, such as cleaner-burning fuels or public transportation, as is also true of many residents in Miramichi—Grand Lake. The claim that the carbon tax is revenue neutral was always a claim about what the government would take in, not what consumers would actually be paying. The Liberal government members want people to believe they can keep increasing taxes and people will still end up with more money in their pockets; but this is not true for farmers, first nations or the families who are heating their homes in this country.

I am blessed to have four children who are very active. We need all hands on deck on the weekends, taking them to events that can occur across the province. My mother assists my wife on most days when I am here; sometimes, my dad assists as well. They are both 66 years old. There was a weekend when my daughter was in Saint John for a gymnastics championship. That is a six-hour round trip from Blackville, where I reside. My son's high school hockey team won a provincial tournament played in Saint-Léonard, New Brunswick, the home of my good friend Senator Percy Mockler. It was an exciting final game, but it took an eight-hour round-trip drive.

If someone lives in a rural area, such as Miramichi—Grand Lake, and they need to drive the kids to sporting, arts or cultural events, then they know the painful impact the carbon tax is having. They are paying more every single time they fill up their car or truck.

Unfortunately, some children who played sports prior to the carbon tax are now not playing those sports, because the parents cannot keep up with the costs. It is very real. It is happening in my community and in first nations communities. Most people in my area have at least two vehicles; one is usually a truck. Let me be clear: They are not electric, but that is a story for another day. People are struggling.

I attended the finance committee's pre-budget consultation in Fredericton not long ago, this fall. The head of the largest food bank in Fredericton told us that they saw a 35.7% increase in use last year. Across Canada, there were nearly two million food bank visits in 2023, the highest food bank use in Canadian history. Canadians are being forced to use food banks because of the Liberal government's out-of-control inflationary spending. It is driving up the cost of everything. On top of this, it is driving up the cost of food even further.

Canada's Food Price Report 2023 predicts that food costs for a typical family of four will rise by $700 in 2024. This is on top of an increase of $1,065 in 2023. We can think about that. The typical family of four is going to pay $1,700 or more for groceries in just two years than they were already paying. The carbon price's negative impact on food inflation is real. Meat, vegetables and baked goods are up 5% to 7%. That is why we are calling on the Liberal government to take the tax off farmers, first nations and home heating for families.

Farmers are being left out in the cold by the NDP-Liberal coalition, which is desperate to prevent them from getting a carbon tax carve-out for grain drying, barn heating and other farm operations. The Liberal carbon tax will continue to go up every year, increasing the pain felt by farmers, first nations and families.

For my Miramichi—Grand Lake constituents, the upcoming choice will be clear. The NDP and Liberals take their money, tax their food, punish their work and double their housing costs. It is a choice between the costly NDP-Liberal coalition and a common-sense Conservative government that will axe the tax. It is the only choice for Canadians, for farmers, for families and for first nations.

On the topic of farmers, I spent a lot of time on a file recently with the National Capital Commission. There was a group that had to tear down an old stable, and they replaced it with an $8-million barn. It was laced with the best fibre optics on Planet Earth, an elevator that goes down under the ground and solar panels. It has all these luxury features. It is a barn. Farmers right now need a carve-out on the carbon tax so they can grow us the food that we need to stay healthy in this country, and we have a government that approved a budget for a corporation to build an $8-million barn.

I can tell everyone today that there is a choice. Miramichi—Grand Lake constituents have a choice too in the upcoming election, and I am proud to give it to them. The costly NDP-Liberal coalition takes Canadians' money, takes their food, taxes their food, punishes their work and doubles their housing costs. A common-sense Conservative government is the only choice, because we will bring it home and axe the tax.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing]

Madam Speaker, I have been listening throughout the day to this debate and to Conservative members talk about the increase in the price of food, which is a concern across the country.

Can the hon. member explain why the increase in the price of food is even higher in the United States than it is in Canada, given the fact that it does not have a price on pollution?

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, once again, let me highlight this great occasion of the censorship party that values American politics and American news more than what is going on in our country. The story here is that the Liberals imposed a carbon tax, everything is too expensive and nobody can afford it. I am ashamed that he has time to talk about American politics. It is shameful.

[Lisa Marie Barron, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Madam Speaker, at this point, I normally say that I appreciate working alongside my colleague, but I am very adamant that I need to tell the truth at all times in this chamber.

If the Conservative member is concerned about first nations communities, will he commit to supporting the Assembly of First Nations' call for an additional $30 billion in climate adaptation funding for communities?

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, the story today is that we are trying to take the tax off Canadians. This is what this debate is about. First nations in New Brunswick know that I am their friend. I have been their minister and it has worked out well. I have great relationships.

I am sick and tired of coming here when there are people in this House, who do not sit far from me, who were dressed up like Yasser Arafat just a few days ago. Yes, I am going to mention that.

We need to take the tax off food, farmers, first nations and families.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This is the second time the hon. member has done this, and I do not know who he is addressing, but I believe he is suggesting, which he has suggested before and is suggesting again, that hon. members in this place support terrorism. We disagree. He just said it is true.

I am hoping the hon. member will retract his remarks because it is wildly inappropriate to suggest that any hon. member in this place supports terrorism.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member did not quite go that far, but I would ask members to be very prudent in comments they make about other colleagues.

The hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake can finish his answer.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, what we are debating here today makes it clear that the Conservative Party is the only clear choice for Canadians to take the tax off farmers, first nations and families who heat their homes. That is what we are trying to do here today. It is shameful that the NDP and Liberals are against that.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I understand that the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake is concerned about the carbon tax going up in his community. It is true the carbon tax went up two cents a litre last year and the rebates went up more for most folks, but what is also true is that the profits of the oil and gas industry went up 18¢ a litre for every single constituent of his as well.

I wonder if the member is similarly concerned about the excess profits, the gouging that is happening and what he is proposing to address that, for example, taking those profits and directing them toward adjusting the affordability concerns of folks in Miramichi—Grand Lake.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, it is hard to take lessons from the Greens, the NDP or the Liberals when they supported Loblaws getting $17 million for brand new freezers and fridges. They talk about corporations, but then they want to subsidize the ones they prefer. This is about taking the tax off families, first nations and farmers and no longer leaving Canadians out in the cold.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague just said again that the Conservatives wanted to repeal the tax on families. How is a family defined in the context of their motion? It is not defined. Is it when there are at least two parents and one child? Is a couple without children a family? That will be pretty much—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The member's telephone is vibrating. If he could move it away from the microphone, I would appreciate it.

The hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, someone was unaware that I was speaking.

The member just referred to families, and I would like to know what is the Conservatives' definition of family. Are we talking about two parents with one child? Will people who have no children pay the carbon tax? I would like to understand that part.

I would also like the member to tell me whether it is true that low-income families receive a rebate in the provinces that are subject to the carbon tax. Since Quebec is not subject to the carbon tax, we do not have much information about it.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Speaker, I know he is concerned with provincial jurisdiction in Quebec. I would not have a lot of insight into that.

What will matter here today is whether the other members and the other parties in this House will have the courage and the integrity to stand up and vote on a non-confidence vote to make sure the tax is taken off first nations, farmers and families who heat their houses.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I move that, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, if the House has not disposed of all questions related to the business of supply for the period ending December 10, 2023, by 11:59 p.m. later this day, the Speaker shall suspend the proceedings of the House until the next calendar day at 7 a.m., at which time the proceedings will resume, provided that (1) in the event that consideration of any motion or bill based on the supplementary estimates (B) is not completed by 11:59 p.m. that day, the Speaker shall again interrupt the proceedings until the next calendar day at 7 a.m., in order to dispose of the business of supply; (2) at the end of the said supply period, the House shall adjourn to the next sitting day, pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

All those opposed to the hon. minister's moving the motion will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Red Deer—Mountain View.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise today, especially to speak on behalf of farmers, first nations and families.

The members of the Liberal-NDP government are completely out of touch with the real needs of Canadians. Their blind, ideological obsession has increased the price of groceries for a family of four by over $700, bringing the total family cost to over $16,000.

Ontario first nations are seeking a judicial review of the federal government's carbon pricing regime, arguing that Ottawa's pollution pricing policy unjustly and disproportionately burdens their communities.

Farmers continue to be handcuffed by an embedded carbon tax on farm inputs that unfairly affects their bottom line and affects their competitiveness within the global agricultural market. Farming and farmers across this country have unique obstacles through which they must navigate. Those farmers who do not face competition from foreign food suppliers tend to be able to pass some of the added expenses onto the consumer but costs like fuel, fertilizer, herbicides, seed, labour, transportation, capital costs, interest and property taxes cause many sleepless nights for farmers. Another item that many businesses would factor in is profit; however, that is never guaranteed in farming.

While we are discussing competitiveness, if we look to our friends in Australia, who have axed the tax in favour of a direct action policy, where investment dollars are available, the competitiveness is creating new technology and achieving targets without taxing citizens and businesses. Canadian farmers, first nations, and small and medium-sized businesses in Canada are grappling with a competitiveness problem because of these restrictive and harmful Liberal-NDP coalition policies. We see this competitive disadvantage compared to our international allies that do not have a carbon tax, like the United States. We see Canadian companies that have developed clean technology or telecommunications achievements leaving Canada because they cannot gain funding to scale business for American investors who are backed by more flexible government policies.

Canadian competitiveness is also hampered by the government's lack of cohesive policies to counter China and the supply chain issue. We have heard over and over how the Liberal-NDP coalition believes Canada needs to produce domestic critical minerals, but the action lags behind their desire in this area. We are ever more reliant on China and its network of critical mineral mines around the world to produce things like EV batteries.

We are seeing the highest level of food bank use. We are seeing food report after food report showing grocery prices on the rise. The increasing input costs for products, global events and rising production costs have contributed to these price increases.

Something that I want to come back to is the fact that first nations in Ontario are seeking a judicial review of the Liberal-NDP carbon pricing regime. They disclosed in court documents the adverse effect that carbon taxes had on their communities. In a Globe and Mail article, they noted that the carbon price violates the principles of reconciliation and their constitutional rights. They also disclosed that they tried to negotiate with the coalition government. Why were they not able to reach an agreement? It is no secret that the carbon price rebate is tied to one's income. As the Ontario chiefs noted, “many First Nations members living on reserves do not pay income tax and cannot access the rebates”. That is another example of the coalition government developing policy that is restrictive and built in a box, instead of something that is adaptive and that would consider the challenges that first nations face on reserve.

There is a pan-Canadian ripple effect of the carbon pricing regime the Liberal-NDP coalition is pushing. The cost is downloaded onto consumers, products and services, but now the government wants Canadians to dig a little deeper and really give up their last red cent. These destructive policies are having a profound impact on Canadians' ability to balance their budget, make ends meet and put food on their tables.

Coming back to the food price report released today, it paints a bleak picture of struggling Canadians. Food costs will rise anywhere from 2.5% to 4.5% this year. The average family of four is expected to spend $16,297 on groceries in 2024. Canadians are reducing the amount they are spending on groceries. Between 2022 and 2023, Canadians reduced the amount they spent in food and beverage retail by 3.26%. The reason is they have a lot of other bills they have to pay. Canadians are being forced to supplement or totally use food banks, and the government has failed to realize that its destructive policies directly impact the struggles of Canadians, first nations and farmers.

Speaking of farmers, right now I am farmer and have a lot experience in this regard. I am very concerned about what happened in the Senate, as we know that farmers feed communities and provide the commodities we need to advance our food security at times when they are needed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: The hon. member for Saskatoon—Grasswood, Finance, and the hon. member for Kitchener Centre, Canadian Heritage.

It being 5:15 p.m. and this being the final supply day in the period ending December 10, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.